Homo Vitruvius and American Samizdat function houses for my weekly artistic writing and mental exploration. HV persists as my authentic and first Substack in these pursuits; AS arose in resistance to Trumpism and is devoted to its defeat. From memoir and poetry to fiction and drama, principally in HV, to historical past and political philosophy, predominantly in AS, you can find it right here, built-in throughout the 2 stacks by means of a artistic and mental sensibility I hope you can find invigorating. The stacks could also be subscribed collectively or singly in Handle Subscription.
Your help for my writing on these two stacks lifts me up. Your readership and your likes, your feedback, shares, and suggestions, and your free and paid subscriptions allow me within the artistic undertaking of my writing life and in my mission to supply a renascent mild towards the darkness: artwork, data, tradition, and concepts for a free, tolerant, and democratic folks. Thanks in your curiosity and help.
This essay is a present revision of an essay first printed early final 12 months, now targeted by means of the very present and specific American circumstance of the title. After I first wrote it, the essay was instantly impressed by a literary argument on the time that harkened again to earlier inventive disagreements. Its theme, the competition of concepts, or agon — from the traditional Greek contest, wrestle, or battle — is one I’ve been publicly creating since 2011, when Christopher Hitchens died. The totally intellectually dishonest and disreputable Glenn Greenwald, whose subsequent profession solely served absolutely to verify all I stated about him in these years, used the event to assault Hitchens, whom, Greenwald acknowledged, he had by no means engaged or written about whereas Hitchens was alive. On the streets the place I grew up, there are unbecoming epithets for individuals who battle like that. Hitchens, like all of us, had his flaws, however none of those have been amongst them. I titled that essay “Christopher Hitchens, Glenn Greenwald, and the Struggle of Concepts.” How we’d profit if we nonetheless had Hitchens alive and on this battle with us. After I wrote the sooner model of the essay, I did so in that current election 12 months anticipating the approaching risks and wishes. I revise now in success of them.
The traditional Greeks famously seeded the backyard of civilization with, amongst different botanicals, philosophy, democracy, rhetoric, pure science, drama, epic poetry, a full universe of symbolic and personified mythology — and the Olympics. The Olympics lengthen farther again in time, maybe, than all of these different contributions however the epic poetry, as tune. The traditional Olympics — gatherings for sport, as we’d suppose it — have been websites of contest and competitors. The Greek phrase for it’s “agon,” from which English derives protagonist and antagonist, main figures of drama in contest — in battle — with one another.
The hardship of the agon, with its take a look at of endurance and can, the opportunity of loss, and the bodily or psychological ache inherent within the contest produces one other by-product time period: agony. Declared the voiceover introduction to the lengthy working U.S. ABC tv sports activities program The Large World of Sports activities, it confirmed us “the joys of victory and the agony of defeat.”
There was at Olympia, Greece, website of the earliest video games, even a statue of the personified spirit of Agon.
We learn it from Classicist Nigel B. Crowther that
the Olympic Video games weren’t really the Olympic Video games in historic Greece, . . . since they weren’t diversions or amusements, however the topic of actual competitors with all the pieces it implies.
Competitors (or the agon) permeated the society of the Greeks. In accordance with the distinguished Classicist Bernard Knox, “this aggressive spirit had its roots within the disparate nature of their political group, the cities all vying for territory, for predominance.”
After we consider agonism in our lives, within the lifetime of the world — the competition over all of the issues people contest, the conflicts that ensue — we are able to think about the Greeks each to have been expressing all through their tradition a worth — an esteemed perfect — and embodying of their lives what they believed to be their pure selves.
After I ponder the spirit of the agon in my very own life, I see a number of influences. I’ve talked about up to now my love of sports activities vehicles, from which follows quick driving. I pursued this exercise in essentially the most amateurish vogue, as most quick drivers do, no matter their fantasies, by rushing on public roadways. Sometimes, my youthful testosterone bumping up towards its like, enclosed on the street in one other 5 or six-geared machine revving its motor, I engaged in impromptu one-on-one races. Probably the most memorable befell between the Verrazano Narrows Bridge crossing of New York’s Belt Parkway in Brooklyn and the Rockaway Boulevard exit to JFK airport in Queens, a distance of practically 25 miles.
My Datsun 280ZX turned pitted in pure eruption of male aggression towards a Mazda RX7, a contest in these days that most likely struck each drivers as ordained by the automobiles. I by no means noticed the opposite, male driver’s face. The parkway visitors, noon, flowed in its common New York density, although freely sufficient for such a race, of countless weaving out and in, to transpire. We reached speeds, when potential, of 90-100 MPH. The race revealed us each to be good, amateurishly expert drivers. That this conduct was totally and recklessly irresponsible goes with out saying, however there, I’ve stated it. We’d have brought on horrendous injury and lack of life. I used to be then 28 years outdated, on the peak of my and my startup employer’s enterprise success, and the closing remark to each cocktail-infused enterprise strategizing session at some bar every evening amongst we younger execs, from somebody, was “Fuck ‘em if they’ll’t take a joke.”
That is a part of my level: I used to be younger, male, and steaming forward in full bore competitiveness.
In such a race, there is no such thing as a end line recognized to each contestants, so every imagines his personal. For me, it was that Rockaway Boulevard exit: I used to be due again on the workplace. We exchanged the lead many instances. The fun of such racing is within the contingency of the course, with sudden unmapped obstacles (different, oblivious vehicles and drivers) second by second showing in your means. It’s online game life earlier than video video games, however you possibly can actually die. If I used to be within the lead after I exited the parkway, in my thoughts I might have gained. Not removed from the exit, I used to be certainly within the lead, and at that time, from current maneuvering, within the center lane. The opposite driver was rushing up towards me within the left lane. If he handed me, I might don’t have any time to regain the lead earlier than exiting. I had time and area to chop into the left lane forward of him. But it surely was shut: would he be capable of gradual in time, and what if not?
I let him go.
Agony of defeat.
I’ve attributed this conduct up to now to a generic younger male’s aggressive starvation for contest. However I didn’t suppose myself a mere generic younger male and, like anybody else, I wasn’t. The twenty-eight-year-old me, born of the actual circumstances of my life, acted out his new-born assertiveness in response to the hurts of his youth. As I’ve written, I used to be a painfully shy and delicate little one, who usually recoiled from the injuries the world inflicted on him. I reacted towards my hurts in upsurges of anger, often rage, towards no matter or whoever it was that stood to wound me.
So when my young-businessman self acted out his assertiveness, it wasn’t merely “younger male” fulfilling his genetically programmed, hormonally boosted function. It was “me,” saying I wasn’t going to take this anymore. I might arise for myself, and from what I may more and more see on the earth round me, there was a lot to face up towards.
The method of studying self-defense after which assertion was gradual. When nonetheless that timid little one, I attended a Catskill Mountains summer season boxing camp run by Al Silvani, the previous coach of center weight champ Rocky Graziano. I discovered properly sufficient for an 8-year-old: I gained the junior division competitors. Boxing turned part of my life, not as a sport I pursued, although I may now battle for myself, however as an anger-channeling curiosity. After I first entered into psychotherapy at 17, after my devastating freakout on LSD, my therapist was struck by the psychological identification I had established with Heavyweight Champ Muhammad Ali. I hadn’t earlier than thought-about it. However in fact, Ali served as good stand in for anybody who felt “the world,” some highly effective combination of forces, stood towards him, working to stop him from being himself, unmolested and unrestrained.
Amongst my different sporting pursuits, boxing remained a passionate attachment all by means of Ali’s profession and the game’s second golden age of the Seventies and 80s. I noticed the key fights of all the best champions, particularly people who matched them towards one another. I appreciated the artistry of the “candy science,” however after I attended fights with my male friends, we rose with the blood in our veins and cheered with fists that punched the air when our favourite rallied a fierce bombardment of punches upon the toppling tree of his opponent.
There was extra happening than candy science.
Earlier and much higher than my enterprise bravado and sporting barbarism have been my artistic and mental drives, creating as they have been below the various influences of New York Metropolis’s spirited Sixties and 70s social and cultural battle zone. These influences included, prominently, the largely Jewish, New York Intellectuals, who had solid their early careers within the social and political tumult of the Melancholy period. In accordance with Ronnie A. Grinberg in Write like a Man: Jewish Masculinity and the New York Intellectuals, this numerous group developed as a “testosterone-driven literary circle.” They exalted, she writes, “a masculinity centered on energy, toughness, and virility,” which turned a attribute of the mental lifetime of New York. Writes Benjamin Balint, reviewing Grinberg’s e book, these have been “a bunch … who ‘prized verbal combativeness, polemical aggression, and an unflinching fashion of argumentation.’”
However nevertheless a lot one may tie a profile of those writers to a bunch psychological evaluation and an anatomy of a singular ethnic group’s historico-cultural growth, the contest of concepts — to the demise even — looms as outdated as the primary thought and over all mental historical past.
By the late Nineteen Nineties, although, one thing had steadily modified in me. In lots of group sports activities, a preening celebratory fashion and macho posturing, which had by no means been mine to start, started to switch, towards any attraction to me, the extra modest athletic comportment that had lengthy beforehand reigned. (The important level about Muhammad Ali was his singularity. The good NFL working again Jim Brown, crossing the aim line, merely, modestly, handed the ball to the ref, as if, he used to say, I’d been there earlier than.) The lads (now girls, too) who beat one another up for a residing, in a hoop or a cage, not provided even the dullest reflection of myself. The urge to drive quick extra slowly waned, however wane it has.
These will appear age’s attribute diminishments, and they’re definitely usually that.
However not all folks like sports activities, ever of their lives, not to mention one as brutal as boxing. Most individuals don’t have any drive, because it have been, to drive quick. They will not be particularly aggressive. They don’t relish the competition. They search quieter lives of safety and peace, wherein to boost youngsters, to expertise love and friendship, to savor the pleasures of life on this earth for the time allotted to every of us.
For a few centuries now, nevertheless, such an aspiration, such lives have been denigrated ideologically as a bourgeois complacency. To settle in a single’s ambitions for a life for that, when folks endure?
But struggling isn’t merely the passive reception of hardship and ache. It’s, too, the energetic endurance of struggling to beat hardship and ache — and to what finish is it that we expect ourselves right here to endure? Is it not for the possibility at peace and safety, love and friendship, the pleasures of the earth?
Many individuals prepared themselves and attain for that time of simplified want solely later in life. The delights and private enlargement of journey. Walks alongside the shore. Gardening. Birding. Studying. Listening to the wind. They could as soon as have engaged the agon of their time, they might have contested, however life wears us down. It’s wearying. Public life and personal life. What number of battles are you able to battle, what number of loves are you able to lose, how many individuals? The inspirational hymn trade will urge virtually everybody again up and onward. There comes a time, although, when many individuals search a retreat. Possibly it’s, in that means, a retreat. Are they not entitled? Should everybody battle to the demise? Are we laboring below the phantasm of some sort of victory right here?
For many individuals, although, perhaps most, there was by no means a time after they wished to compete, to contest, to take part within the agon. Most individuals keep away from battle. They don’t prefer it, they can’t bear it. They’ll run from it. They won’t present on the metaphorical barricades not to mention the literal ones. Fairly than contest, they may abide. Ethical braveness is uncommon on this world, rarer even than bodily braveness, which is uncommon sufficient. However we subject armies of the bodily brave. We subject them over and over, technology after technology. They’re armies of the younger, too, and naturally, naturally, bodily stronger, however possessed additionally of that drive, as quick as they’ll, to get to Rockaway Boulevard forward of the opposite man.
I don’t really recall quite a lot of psychological evaluation of why Christopher Hitchens engaged each dialogue as if aimed toward nothing lower than a King’s concession at Runnymede. Clearly, he lived for the competition. He was the very statue of Agon at Olympia with the breath of life infused. What have been his private daemons? Does it matter to the competition?
Early final 12 months author Ann Manov delivered an evisceration of author Lauren Oyler in Bookforum that may lead some to surprise, not figuring out Oyler, what does it take to launch so witheringly private an assault on one other author?
Private, I say?
Private as a result of given the scope and particularity of the critique, it was not criticism of 1 dangerous poem or a weak novel. It was critique of the author’s complete undertaking — the writing as ideational illustration of the one that writes. To evaluate the writing as Manov judges Oyler’s is to guage Oyler. Learn one thing extra about Oyler, past and earlier than Manov, and one would be taught that devastating critique of different writers has been her personal mode. The author with out pity obtained taken out by somebody with a sharper blade, a faster draw, a heavier fist.
The historical past of writing and of concepts runs purple ink bloody with vituperative battle over what counts.
Across the time of Manov’s takedown of Oyler, the thinker of science Daniel Dennet died. The New York Times headline referred to him as “extensively learn and fiercely debated.” He had pursued a selected mental agonism himself with the late evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould:
He was particularly disdainful of the eminent paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould, whose concepts on different components of evolution have been summarily dismissed by Mr. Dennett as “goulding.”
Not surprisingly, Mr. Dennett’s writings may elicit robust criticism as properly — to which he typically reacted with fury.
If we have been to learn the Instances’ obituary of Gould, we’d be taught that the terribly influential researcher and scholar, “[f]amed for each brilliance and conceitedness, . . . was the thing of admiration and jealousy, each revered and reviled by colleagues.” We’d be taught that he “was dogged by vociferous, usually high-profile critics.” Additional, “Generally these criticisms descended into accusations that have been as private as mental. Punctuated equilibrium, for instance, has been known as ‘evolution by jerks.’” Gould himself cherished the motto of the Paleontological Society:
Frango ut patefaciam — ‘I break as a way to reveal.”
However these are debates over vital issues of science, and of understanding the bodily universe itself — hail Galileo!
After we’re speaking about books and tradition, nevertheless, isn’t that simply being imply?
Manov-Oyler appeared a 2020s replay of the notorious Renata Adler blitzkrieg of fellow New Yorker author and movie critic Pauline Kael again in 1980. In that occasion, I had felt invested in a means I wasn’t final 12 months. Nice uprisings in creativity had energized the artwork of varied nationwide cinemas within the Sixties and 70s, together with American, collective developments within the artwork not matched since, and Kael had established herself in the New Yorker because the main voice in American movie criticism. She introduced a contemporary, very important voice, with a imaginative and prescient of what movie was and could possibly be that was all her personal. She even in contrast Bernardo Bertolucci’s 1972 New York Movie Pageant opening evening movie, Final Tango in Paris, an equal to the historic and sensational premiere of Igor Stravinsky’s 1913 The Ceremony of Spring. (She was incorrect.) Many cineastes aligned along with her imaginative and prescient. Many youthful critics turned acolytes. However many others rejected all of it, got here to suppose over time her imaginative and prescient mistaken and her fashion rank. When Adler, the much better author — who had really herself been New York Instances movie critic for a single 12 months in 1968 — printed within the New York Evaluate of Books “The Perils of Pauline,” she stated it for all of us.
Now, When the Lights Go Down, a set of her evaluations over the previous 5 years, is out; and it’s, to my shock and with out Kael- or Simon-like exaggeration, not merely, jarringly, piece by piece, line by line, and with out interruption, nugatory. It seems to embody one thing appalling and widespread within the tradition. Through the years, that’s, Ms. Kael’s quirks, mannerisms, ways, and excesses haven’t solely taken over her work so totally that hardly anything, nothing definitely of intelligence or sensibility, stays; they’ve additionally proved contagious, in order that the content material and stage of crucial dialogue, of flicks but in addition of different varieties, have been altered astonishingly for the more serious. . .. Ms. Kael has added a completely new fashion of advert hominem brutality and intimidation; the substance of her work has develop into little greater than an try, with an odd variant of flak promoting copy, to coerce, really to power numb acquiescence, within the laying down of a remarkably trivial and authoritarian social gathering line.
As Manov after her, Adler proceeded to substantiate her case — in voluminous, 8000-word element. You may disagree along with her judgment, however you couldn’t come again with “For instance?”
If one cared much less, one may suppose or ask, is that this actually obligatory, such vitriol? Over films?
And that’s what it comes all the way down to, ultimately, isn’t it? — whether or not one cares about no matter, and why one cares. Does movie matter? Does literature? Artwork? Concepts? Not a lot, essentially, at any second, cooling your forehead on the deck. But when one observes how concepts produce actions and results — and results their sensible penalties for folks on the earth, if one considers that tradition isn’t merely consumed however enacted, then these influencing and shaping tradition matter. Whenever you suppose somebody has gotten it incorrect, perhaps terribly, terribly incorrect, you suppose it issues. Observe, too, how each Adler and Manov reply, partly, to somebody who frequently dishes out what they then proceed to return: “Ms. Kael has added a completely new fashion of advert hominem brutality and intimidation,” Adler writes. Manov tells us of Oyler that she “owes her current notoriety to ‘takedowns’ of a sequence of distinguished girls” and that it “seems that No Judgment shows most of the flaws Oyler as soon as so forcefully recognized in others.”
There may be, in each circumstances then, one thing deeply felt about, and offended by, the writing of the topic. Name it private if you need. I didn’t prefer it when Muhammed Ali was denigrated for his shade, his faith, the very identify he wished to be known as. I didn’t prefer it when Bernard Malamud’s fixer, Jewish within the Tsar’s Russia, was imprisoned for a criminal offense he didn’t commit and tortured. I didn’t prefer it when anybody, anyplace, was imprisoned unjustly and held down — after I was held down, powerless to avoid wasting myself throughout my wild, thrashing hallucinatory LSD nightmare, calling out, Let me go! Let me go!
I didn’t prefer it when the world reached out — right here, there, each time, nevertheless — to harm me.
Right here, take this, then: jab, jab, proper cross, left hook. Increase.
It’s all private ultimately. We embody and enact it. Which doesn’t imply it’s all subjective and it isn’t true.
So I pose the query now — Will Individuals battle to avoid wasting their democracy, to protect their freedom? All these Individuals who dislike competitors, who keep away from the competition, who flip away from the wrestle, who abjure the agon? Who want to take pleasure in their quiet lives within the hope they’ll maintain their heads down and be handed over by the implications of what’s occurring — what has occurred all around the world however not in america. For what is going on in america, I’ve written already, has by no means occurred earlier than within the historical past of the world — {that a} nation so massively highly effective and influential slipped from liberal, lawful democracy into brutalitarian tyranny. As soon as absolutely completed, the top of that tyranny may not be seen within the life span of anybody residing in the present day.
That’s the determination going through each American who opposes tyranny, and never making it’s making it, too, nonetheless, as every single day that passes now we slip farther from the opportunity of stopping it.
And the choice comes with prices both means. And they are often nice both means. As a result of the agon is happening whether or not you take part in it or not. You possibly can win or you possibly can lose. You possibly can lose with a wrestle or with out one. If folks wish to roll over, they’ll. Nobody will cease them. That’s the selection, that’s the determination— what, in extremis, your life is about.
You enter the ring and throw punches, then punches will come again at you. You will have to have the ability to take it, stand up off the canvas. Generally you’ll win — you’ll crow about it. Generally you’ll lose.
It’s the competitors, the competition, the wrestle, down in your knees, grappling head and shoulders. It’s onerous. It hurts. It issues.
Agonies of the agon.
AJA
